“The conventional wisdom is that most people use PCs because they have to, and Macs are the easier, safer, and more reliable option. But if you’re a Mac user, you already know about their persistent fulfillment problems, the $129 price tag for all OS X updates, and gradually increasing security concerns. The latest? Apple’s planning to release a new iMac, but it won’t be available until September–well after Apple stores run out of the current model. Maybe it’s actually time to think about switching to a PC,” ZDNet’s site (part of CNET Networks, Inc.) actually reads before they take a look at (try to sell) a bunch of Wintel junk. This steaming paragraph was found plopped out under the headline, “Apple has its worms, too. Why not switch?”
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Unbelievable. Do they hide more of this crap in reviews of Wintel junk assuming Mac users would never bother to look at a bunch of seriously ugly plastic space heaters running a badly-faked version of Classic Mac OS? No, we didn’t find this one (how could we have?) – a user forwarded us the link. The MDN reader wishes to remain anonymous as he “is embarrassed to have been reading it in the first place. My eyes are in pain. I am truly sorry. And long live Macintosh!”
“The conventional wisdom is that most people use PCs because they have to, and Macs are the easier, safer, and more reliable option.” In this case, the conventional wisdom is perfectly correct and the nameless ZDNet writer of this tripe is a shameless whore. As is the editor who proofread it, if there even was one.
Related MacDailyNews articles:
Is Mac OS X really inherently more secure than Windows? – August 26, 2003
BusinessWeek’s Haddad gets it wrong; thinks low market share spares Macs from viruses – August 28, 2003
Shattering the Mac OS X ‘security through obscurity’ myth – August 28, 2003
Fortune columnist: ‘get a Mac’ to thwart viruses; right answer for the wrong reasons – September 02, 2003
New York Times: Mac OS X ‘much more secure than Windows XP’ – September 18, 2003
Columnist tries the ‘security through obscurity’ myth to defend Windows vs. Macs on virus front – October 1, 2003
Gates: Windows ‘by far the most secure’ system; tries to use ‘Mac OS X secure through obscurity’ myth – January 27, 2004
Mac OS X has no viruses; what’s wrong with Windows? – February 11, 2004
Spyware, adware plague Windows users online; Mac OS X users surf freely – April 19, 2004
Gartner: Worms jack up the total cost of Microsoft Windows – May 07, 2004
Apple exec: Mac OS X is ‘more secure than other platforms, certainly more secure than Microsoft Windows’ – June 14, 2004
Microsoft developing own antivirus software for leaky Windows – June 16, 2004
What’s the point of Anti-Virus for already-virus-free Mac OS X? – June 24, 2004
129 for an OS upgrade is reasonable. M$ windows xp upgrade was $200 and the full version was $300. At least there were major innovations in mac upgrades compared to win2k to xp. Win XP just looked different and placed things in different places; no really new cool features.
Moo
Really now. After a while, this crap is sort of funny. Let them say what they will. The proof is still in the computing experience, and Windoze has never come close to the feel of a Mac . . .
Lame…who can’t wait another 6 weeks for the new iMac and would rather go ahead a buy a PC.
hmmm…lets look at Longhorn and Tiger. Longhorn 2006-2007, Tiger 2005…look who’s waiting now?! Until then, enjoy those XP, IE critical updates.
Wow.
That is an unbelievable load of bull… And that’s coming from a guy who has used (sold, evangelized) PC’s for the last 15 years, and just recently switched to a Mac.
THIS JUST IN!
PC has its worms, too. Why not switch?
Macs are the easier, safer, and more reliable option. If you’re a PC user, you already know about their monopolizing issues, the hundreds of free critical updates, and exploding security concerns. The latest? Microsoft�s planning to release a new operating system, but it won’t be available until 2005, wait, 2006, no! 2050–decades after Apple�s OS X Tiger. Maybe it’s actually time to think about switching to a Mac. Consider these alternatives. MAC!
Someone should tell ZDNet that April Fool’s Day is in APRIL!! Not July.
I checked, and nope, April 1st has come and gone. I agree with bleekr, after a while this stuff is sort of funny, but tinged with pathetic desperation. The article states that Mac users “already know about their persistent fulfillment problems”. Really? I certainly don’t have any. My 15″ AlBook and Panther have exceeded my expectations. The writer can’t seriously be suggesting that the Macs “problems” are anywhere near as numerous, annoying or potentially serious as those of PC’s, much less bad enough to induce a Mac user to switch. I hope the ZDnet editorial staff has enough asbestos boxers to go around, because I don’t need a crystal ball to foresee that their asses are going to get flamed.
The title now reads “Apple’s no-show iMacs” like a regular news article might, but once you click on it, it switches to “Apple has its worms, too. Why not switch?”
It makes me sick.
And happy at the same time.
This means that Apple is doing something RIGHT, and ZDNet (and others) are starting to get scared.
I think they’re anticipating September, and what it brings.
$129 for an upgrade, not $129 for an update. There is a difference. Updates are generally free, upgrades generally aren’t.
This was a hilarious way to start my Saturday morning after breakfast. I have to head out to Harvey Norman now to buy a PC as I can’t wait a few weeks for the new iMacs….. Lucky I found this article, otherwise I wouldn’t know what to do!
The fullfillment problems are referring to shipping delays which have been pretty bad this year.
I think the second half of this year will turn out better for Apple as far as their supply goes.
Unfortunately for Apple it has set itself up so high that if it does not hit a home run everytime it comes up to bat, the 97% that don�t use Apple make it an easy target to attack.
And unfortunately for Apple, the last year or so has been filled with lots of bunts, foul balls and strike outs.
(Okay…I metaphored that editorial comment to death.)
The iMac delivery date of Sept. has been Apple-ized. In actuality it will be announced in late September with delivery after the Christmas shopping season…unfortunately.
Whats funny is that no one even dared to put their name on it, and no way to comment on the page. And the computers they put up were all brands we loathe. Dell, eMachines…. what a joke. If I was to venture back to PCs I would only look at HPs as I know that Sonys are nice but only last about 18 months before the problems start in.
Now they can say to their advertisers, “Look, we really support you guys!”
*smooch*
I used to check ZDNet a good bit to get David Coursey’s take on Macs and PCs. Reading between the lines and the feedback opinions, I got the impression that his Mac-positive positions alienated a large block of the PC folks there, possibly including the other writers.
Since his departure there has been very little Mac references, and this cheap shot exposes a shallow bias formerly lurking just below the surface.
McKen, it appears you forgot to mention that their advertisers really need to get support for the other “cheek”, too…
“smooch”
yeah since the imacs are out of stock im going to go buy an feaking emachine, then im driving across town to get derek jeter tatooed on my ass
ZD employees are ridiculous, almost to a person. they make their money off of publications filled with antivirus and security tips, so of course they would want to convince people to buy shoddy computers. the good ones don’t render their users as dependent and desperate for help.
the only bad thing about the dot com bust is that it didn’t last long enough to take these sad sacks into bankruptcy, too.
Did anyone notice that two of the products, with listed release dates of Jan and Apr 2004 respectively, had “Email me when product is available” tags under price range and that there were nearly two dozen “Info Not Available” citations for specs as straight forward as monitor size? Pitiful!
I must say I’m shocked at the prices of these machines! $1350 and you only get a 40 GB HD?!? I thought they always said WinDOS is cheaper! Where’s the 3.2 GHz machine with 20″ flat panel and 250 GB HD for $699 I keep hearing about? Of course I wouldn’t take it if they built it – I have to use XP all day at work and you couldn’t PAY ME enough to take it home!
The funny thing is that they don’t even know when you can buy some of the windoze crap they are trying to sell. “Email me when product is available”?!?!?!?!?!?! what the ____? The real difference between a beautiful and functional Apple computer and a windoze piece of crap is that Apple users don’t mind waiting two months to upgrade, because it is worth it. Did anybody else notice that all the peecees they had on the page cost more than the current iMac? Isn’t Apple too expensive? Isn’t that the argument these IT idiots always make?
better yet, try to rate one of the peecees with a thumbs down. You instantly get a “404 error- page not found” absolutely hilarious.
Ed, if you keep predicting something big will happen in the mac hardware scene in six months you will eventually be right. Some of us have been waiting since January of 2003, and it’s getting silly. Other than the most expensive units to come down the pike (which don’t run VPC btw), apple is lipsticking pigs.
Apple is taking a bite out of the msft apple…..er fruit. Why bring out new popular hardware when you can get $100 plus net for a floppy full of supposed improvments?
It’s been a while since I put my whole diatribe on paper:
Number of windows computers in this room: 4
Total number that I watch over: 11
hours/week on: 20-168
Broadband connections: every one
viruses scanned: 0
cost of virus protection:0
Downtime, so far,: 0
My time to maintain all this: Nothing that outweighs the tea, crumpets, or beer I get while figuring out what the operator did wrong while trying to install some bogus fillagre, a problem mac users don’t have because a) they are scared to do anything out of the ordinary b) none of that stuff exists for macs anyway.
And, I never eat crumpets, and drink not nearly as much beer
as I used to. Tea I like but most of my friends/clients only have decaf hippie junk so who cares.
It IS true that it is not easy to set up a wintel to be safe out of the box, because most people do not read the directions included. But what apple competes against is not the inflated stories of disaster found on this site but an average between those smart enough to do it right (ahem, me) and those who muddle along and surprisingly find that having a wintel, especially a cheap one, is fun despite the problems inherent.
I wonder, as a trader, how aapl would do split into distinct ipod and mac stocks. And like a good lawyer, I know the answer, as do most of you.
$129 for an OS X update? I could have sworn I got the last OS X “update” (which was 10.3.4) via software update for free. The last OS X “upgrade” was in fact $129, but that gets you the full version of Panther.
The last Windows “upgrade” was $199 for Windows XP Professional, although the full version will actually set you back $299. So I don’t see what their point was with mentioning that since Windows is actually $70 higher for the upgrade version and $170 more for the full version.
As for the “gradually increasing security concerns”, call us back when OS X has had even ONE single virus or worm attack and then we’ll talk…